Editorial Policy and Verification Methodology

Every claim on this site traces to one of three things: an ingredient label, a study we can cite, or a page the seller put online. Where two official pages disagree about what the product even is, we show both.

How we rule on a claim

1. Read the label, not the name. A product called “Golden Nerves” is judged on whether its ingredients act on nerves, not on what the bottle is called.
2. Check each ingredient's actual evidence base. Alpha lipoic acid and acetyl L-carnitine have diabetic-neuropathy research; guarana is a stimulant — an ingredient's research endpoint is where its claim has to come from.
3. Check the dose against the format. A gram-level studied dose cannot arrive in a fraction of a millilitre of liquid; we say so plainly.
4. Note what is disclosed. An undisclosed amount is reported as undisclosed, never estimated or assumed adequate.
5. Compare the official pages. Where two official-looking sites sell the same-named product, we read both and note where they agree and differ.
6. Flag the safety edge cases. The B6 neuropathy risk and the caffeine content get named, because a buyer cannot see them on the label.
7. Lead with the medical message. A product bought for nerve symptoms gets the see-a-doctor line near the top, not buried at the bottom.
8. Pharmacist review. Interaction and safety wording is checked by a Certified Diabetes Care and Education Specialist pharmacist.
9. Date it. Every page carries published and updated dates.

Why we never estimate an undisclosed amount

It would be easy to write “probably a few hundred milligrams of alpha lipoic acid” and it would read authoritatively. It would also be invented. Where an amount is not published we print that it is not published, and we reason from what can be checked — the ingredient's known research range, the volume a dropper can carry — instead of filling the gap with a guess.

Sourcing standards

We cite primary sources — government health agencies, peer-reviewed indexes and regulator guidance. We do not cite other affiliate pages, and we never treat a seller's claim as evidence for itself. The sources we rely on most:

• NINDS — peripheral neuropathy
• NIDDK — diabetic neuropathy
• NIH ODS — Vitamin B12
• NIH ODS — Vitamin B6 (neuropathy risk)
• NIH ODS — Carnitine
• NCCIH — Turmeric
• FDA — dietary supplements
• FTC — health products compliance guidance

On describing the two official pages

Where we describe what an official Golden Nerves page publishes, we describe only what is verifiable on that page at the time of writing — the ingredients it lists, the amounts it discloses, the descriptions it gives, the guarantee it states. We draw no conclusion about anyone's intent.

Corrections

If a figure, price or policy statement here is wrong, tell us through the contact page and we will correct it and note the change. If you have a photograph of the actual Supplement Facts panel from a bottle you received, we would particularly like to see it — it would let us publish the ingredient amounts, which would improve this site more than anything else could.

What our reviews are not

They are not medical advice and not a substitute for seeing a doctor. They are not clinical trials of the finished product — no such trial exists, and we say so. And they are never a reason to delay assessment of a nerve symptom, which can signal a treatable condition such as diabetes or B12 deficiency.

Independence

We earn affiliate commission on qualifying purchases. No manufacturer reviews, approves or pays for our content. The critical findings published here — the two-product problem, the missing doses, the dropper-dose ceiling, the B6 risk — are findings a brand-controlled page would have deleted.